Saubhagya Bhagat VS State of Uttarakhand

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

VIPIN SANGHI, MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, RAVINDRA MAITHANI
Saubhagya Bhagat – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
Mr. Girish Chandra Lakchaura and Mr. Dushyant Mainali, learned counsels for the applicant in ABA No. 76 of 2021.
Mr. Arvind Vashistha, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. Disha Vashistha and Mr. Hemant Singh Mehra, learned counsels for the applicant in ABA No. 63 of 2022.
Mr. Alok Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants in ABA No. 101 of 2022.
Mr. Amit Kapri, learned counsel for the applicant in ABA No. 150 of 2022.
Mr. Ganesh Kandpal, learned counsel for the applicant in ABA No. 198 of 2022.
Mr. Bhuwnesh Joshi, learned counsel for the applicant in ABA No. 213 of 2022.
Mr. Tajhar Qayyum, learned counsel for the applicant in ABA No. 281 of 2022.
Mr. C.K. Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant in ABA No. 26 of 2023.
Mr. J.S. Virk, learned Deputy Advocate General, Mr. Rakesh Kumar Joshi and Mr. Pankaj Joshi, learned Brief Holders for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Prabha Naithani, learned counsel for the complainant in ABA No. 215 of 2021.
Mr. B.D. Jha, Ms. Preeti Jha and Ms. Priyanka Jha, learned counsels for the complainant in ABA No. 198 of 2022.

JUDGMENT

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.—The question which falls for consideration by this Larger Bench is whether an application for anticipatory bail is maintainable after charge sheet has been filed in the Court?

2. It transpires that a learned Single Judge of this Court had referred the aforesaid question to a Larger Bench vide order dated 17.08.2022. The said question was answered in the affirmative by a Division Bench vide order dated 7.9.2022. Learned Single Judge, however, was of the opinion that the issues raised in the order of reference have not been considered and then the question was again referred to Larger Bench vide order dated 28.9.2022, passed in ABA/76/2021 and connected matters. Thus, the issue is now before a Full Bench.

3. Since the question was earlier answered by a Division Bench, therefore, before proceeding in the matter, it would be worthwhile to peruse the second order of reference dated 28.9.2022, which is extracted below:

“The following question was referred by this Bench to the Larger Bench on 17.08.2022:-

“Whether an application for anticipatory bail is maintainable after the charge sheet has been filed in the court?”

2. While making the reference, th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

VIPIN SANGHI, MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, RAVINDRA MAITHANISaubhagya Bhagat – AppellantVersusState of Uttarakhand – Respondent

Cases Referred (50)

VIPIN SANGHI, MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, RAVINDRA MAITHANI
Saubhagya Bhagat – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent